Yeshivat Har Etzion Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash (Vbm) *********************************************************
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
YESHIVAT HAR ETZION ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM) ********************************************************* EIKHA: THE BOOK OF LAMENTATIONS By Dr. Yael Ziegler ********************************************************* Dedicated in memory of our alumnus Rav Elyashiv Mordechai Knohl, The Rav of Kibbutz Kfar Etzion and one of its founders. Yehi zikhro barukh. ********************************************************* Shiur #23: Eikha 2:2 בִּל ַּ֨ ע אֲדֹנָָ֜י]לא[ אוְלֹֹ֣ חָמ ַ֗ ל א ֵ֚ ת כָל־נְאֹ֣ ֹות י עֲקֹֹ֔ ב הָרַ֧ ס בְ עֶבְרָת֛ ֹו מִּבְ צְר ֵ֥י ב ת־יְהּודָָ֖ ה הִּגִֹּ֣יע לָאָָ֑רֶ ץ חִּל ֵ֥ל מ מְ לָכָָ֖ה וְשָרֶֶֽ יהָ God swallowed up; He did not pity All of the habitations of Jacob He demolished in his rage The fortresses of the daughter of Judah He thrusts it down to the earth He profaned the kingdom and her officers While the previous verse had a vertical movement, which directs the reader’s gaze up (clouds, heaven, God) and down (Zion, earth, God’s footstool), this verse offers us a horizontal landscape of destruction. God swallows, demolishes, and profanes a broad swathe of Judah: houses and fortresses, kingdom, and officers. The verse moves from the common habitations (possibly in the countryside1) to those protected by fortresses. It 1 The term naot (from the root n.v.h.) can mean either habitations (e.g. see the parallelism with the word bayit in Mishlei 3:33) or meadows (namely, dwelling places for animals: see e.g. Targum Eikha 2:2; Tehillim 23:2; Jeremiah 9:9). Some translators use the term also contains the first indication of the special attention that this chapter gives to the destruction of the royal elite of the city: “[God] profaned the kingdom and her officers.” Verbs: Bila, lo chamal, haras, higi’a, chillel Five verbs portray the active destruction in this verse. God is the subject of each of the verbs: He swallows, does not pity, demolishes, thrusts to the ground, and desecrates His nation. Frequently employed as a verb of destruction, bila literally means to swallow. A verb that can describe the behavior of mindless animals (Jonah 2:1) and wicked people (Habbakuk 1:13), “swallowing” is an all-consuming act, one that engulfs and overpowers, leaving behind no remnant. Often used to describe the hostile act of an enemy (e.g. Hosea 8:7- 8), this is how God presents the actions of Job’s adversary, the Satan, who induces God to torment Job for no good reason (Job 2:3). Jeremiah depicts the Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar, swallowing Jerusalem in a serpent-like act of rapacious hunger (Jeremiah 51:34). In our verse, the Babylonian enemy recedes into the background; it is God Who swallows the city. This verb will appear twice more in verse 5 as part of a terrifying portrait of God’s enmity. The final appearance of this verb in Eikha reverts to the enemies, who gleefully proclaim (in 2:16), “We have swallowed!” The dual usage of this verb to portray both God and enemies illustrates how the chapter blurs between them, as they collaborate to devour Jerusalem. For the second verse in a row, a verbal clause begins with the negative lo, highlighting what God does not do. In this case, God does not exhibit compassion (lo chamal), a phrase that will recur twice more in this chapter (verses 17 and 21). The word lo suggests purposeful withholding, rather than passivity. God’s compassion for His nation is commonplace (e.g. Isaiah 63:9; Joel 2:18; Malachi 3:17); one has the impression that God suppresses His natural instinct. Often used within a ritual, sacred context, the word chillel means to profane something, or remove its sacredness. This verb can denote either sinfulness (e.g. Jeremiah 16:18) or punishment for sins (e.g. Isaiah 47:6), as in our verse. The desecration of the kingdom and her officers hints to their former consecrated status.2 Finally, the orthography of the verb chillel parallels the nominal challal, designating the corpses that languish on Jerusalem’s streets in Eikha 2:12. This apt wordplay illustrates the defilement of the formerly pure city, now sullied by the corpses strewn in its midst. habitations (e.g. NJPS), while others translate pastures (e.g. Westermann, Lamentations, p. 141). 2 For a similar description of the manner in which God punishes the Davidic dynasty by desecrating their royal symbols, see Tehillim 89:39. The Use of Language in Eikha 2:2 Language conveys meaning in many ways. Within the context of the biblical canon, words tend to echo each other in a significant manner. When a word or phrase evokes another biblical passage, it hints to an inter-textual relationship that can offer a richer understanding of both passages. In the following section, we will use Eikha 2:2 as an example to illustrate these linguistic flourishes. Actualizing Prophecies of Admonition The language of destruction in this verse (and throughout Eikha) frequently evokes prophetic admonitions, indicating that their fulfillment has arrived. For example, both Jeremiah and Ezekiel inform Judah of the possibility that God will withhold compassion from His people: And I will also act in anger: My eyes will not have compassion and I will not pity (ve-lo echmol), and they will call out in my ears with a great shout, but I will not listen to them. (Ezekiel 8:18) 3 The destructive verb haras likewise evokes Jeremiah’s stern admonitions: So shall you say to him, “So says God, Behold that which I built, I will destroy (hores) and that which I planted, I will uproot, along with all of this land” (Jeremiah 45:4).4 Similarly, the unusual phrase higi’a la-aretz appears in Ezekiel 13:14 alongside another linguistic association with Eikha 2:2 (haras): And I will demolish (harasti) the wall that you covered with plaster, and I will make it reach the ground (ve-higa’atihu el ha-aretz) and its foundations will be exposed and it will fall, and you will perish within it and you will know that I am God. (Ezekiel 13:14) By employing words that recall prophetic admonitions, Eikha suggests that no part of this catastrophe is unforeseen. While this may be small comfort for those suffering in Jerusalem, it places these events within the broader biblical theology of destruction, making it clear that these catastrophic events are part of the divine order. Reversing Prophecies of Doom 3 See also e.g. Jeremiah 13:14; Ezekiel 5:11; 7:4, 9. 4 Jeremiah’s opening prophecy also employs the word haras to caution of upcoming catastrophe; see Jeremiah 1:10. Prophetic texts of consolation are also in dialogue with Eikha. Several passages spin Eikha’s language of destruction into language of redemption in a linguistic flourish designed to offer solace and hope. For example, Isaiah 49:19 alludes to the destruction described in Eikha 2:2, using its harsh words (haras and bila) to describe Israel’s reconstruction:5 For your ruins and your desolate places and your destroyed land (eretz harisuteikh) will now be bursting with inhabitants, and those who consumed you (mivale’ayikh) will be distanced. (Isaiah 49:19) By employing the same words used to convey the ruin in order to reverse it, the prophet offers hope for a full rehabilitation of Jerusalem and the nation. The broader picture offers an assurance of perfect reconstruction, using the very same language that conveyed a terrible portrait of devastation. In referring to Eikha, these prophets also imply that the destruction is only one stage in God’s plan for His nation. Jerusalem’s destruction is not the end of her story. When the circumstances allow, God will surely reverse Jerusalem’s calamity, returning her to her former status and glory. Therefore, embedded within destruction are the means for her restoration; Jerusalem’s calamity is part of the ongoing relationship between God and His nation. This is the message of R. Akiva, who, in a celebrated aggadic account in Makkot 24b, expresses his stalwart faith in the future, even as he witnesses the collapse of the present.6 In this anecdote, R. Akiva expresses joy in the fulfillment of the prophets’ threat of destruction, inasmuch as it confirms the veracity of the prophets’ messages of rejuvenation. This consoles his forlorn friends, who begin to see the catastrophe as part of a broader historical plan, conceived by God, foretold by prophets, and experienced by the nation of Israel over the course of the long span of Jewish history. 5 While I will not discuss the controversial question of the dating of the composition of Isaiah 40-66, these chapters explicitly offer consolation and promises of redemption that follow the destruction of Jerusalem described in Eikha. (See e.g. Isaiah 48:20; 52:9-10. Note also the explicit reference to Cyrus in Isaiah 44:28-45:1.) These chapters often linguistically reverse the book of Eikha, as we will continue to note throughout our commentary. 6 See shiur #8, where I bring the full text of the aggada. Eikha 2:3 גָד ֹ֣ עבֶָֽ חֳרִּ י־א ַ֗ ף כֵֹ֚ לקֶֹ֣רֶ ןיִּשְרָא ֹ֔ ל השִֵּ֥ יב אָח֛ ֹוריְמִּ ינָ֖ ֹו מִּ נפְ ֹ֣י אֹוי ָ֑ב ו יִּבְע ַ֤רבְ י עֲקֹב֙כְא ש ֹ֣ לֶֶֽהָבָֹ֔ ה אָכְלָָ֖ה סָבִֶּֽ יב He hewed down in his smoking anger All the horns of Israel He withdrew His right hand backward In the face of the enemy And he burned in Jacob as a flaming fire That consumes its surroundings God’s anger continues to smolder in the fourth mention of divine wrath in the chapter’s three initial verses.